Arizona school districts, like any employer, have an obligation to manage its administrators.  This management includes, but is not limited to, notifying its administrators of the school district’s intent to renew or non-renew that administrator’s contract.  In the State of Arizona, the renewal or non-renewal of school district administrators is governed by statue.  Specifically, Arizona Revised Statutes (“A.R.S.”)§15-503 governs the employment of Arizona school district administrators.

The renewal or non-renewal of school district administrators is subject to a specific schedule.  A.R.S. §15-503(D) states,

“On or before May 15 each year, the governing board shall offer a contract for the next school year to each certified administrator and certificated school psychologist who is in the last year of his contract unless, on or before April 15, the governing board, a member of the board acting on behalf of the board or the superintendent of the school district gives notice to the administrator or certificated school psychologist of the board’s intention not to offer a new contract. If the governing board has called for an override election for the third Tuesday in May as provided in section 15-481, the governing board shall offer a contract for the next school year to each certified administrator or certificated school psychologist who is in the last year of his contract on or before June 15 unless, no later than five days after the override election excluding Saturday, Sunday and legal holidays, the governing board, a member of the board acting on behalf of the board or the superintendent of the school district gives notice to the administrator or the certificated school psychologist of the board’s intention not to offer a new contract. The administrator’s or the certificated school psychologist’s acceptance of the contract shall be indicated within thirty days from the date of the written contract or the offer is revoked. The administrator or certificated school psychologist accepts the contract by signing the contract and returning it to the governing board or by making a written instrument that accepts the terms of the contract and delivering the written instrument to the governing board.”

It is worthy of note that this provision only applies to school district “certified” administrators and certificated school psychologists.  The statute does not clearly define which school district administrators are or are not considered “certified.”  One interpretation is that an administrator is only considered “certified” if the administrative position requires a level of certification outlined in the Arizona Administrative Code.

Another interpretation is that which administrative positions are considered “certified” is determined by school district prior practices, policies, or employment contracts.  In other words, if the school district established the administrative position and labeled it “certified” by applicable school district policy or administrative employment contract then the administrator would most likely be considered “certified” and subject to the requirements of A.R.S. §15-503(D).  Similarly, if the school district does not specifically address the issue of whether or not an administrator is “certified” by applicable school district policy or administrative employment contract, the administrator may still be considered “certified” and subject to the requirements of A.R.S. §15-503(D) if the school district’s prior practices and representations to the administrator clearly implied that the school district intended to treat the administrator as “certified” for the purposes of A.R.S. §15-503(D).

The determination of which school district administrative employees are or are not considered “certified” for the purposes of A.R.S. §15-503(D) is largely dependent on the individual facts surrounding each individual administrator’s employment with the school district.  If is for this purpose that it is important for a school district to consult with its legal counsel to determine which administrative employees are subject to the requirements of A.R.S. §15-503(D).

Once it is determined that an administrative employee is considered “certified” and thereby subject to the requirements of A.R.S. §15-503(D), the next step is to determine if the school district intends to renew or non-renew that administrator’s employment contract.  A.R.S. §15-503(D) states that by no later than May 15th the school district Governing Board is required to offer “a contract” to a “certified” administrator.  If the school district intends to renew the administrator, then the school district is simply required to provide the administrator with a contract by no later than May 15th.

It is worthy of note that A.R.S. §15-503(D) only requires that the school district Governing Board offer “a contract” not a contract renewal.  This distinction is important as it signifies that the school district is not required to renew the same terms from the administrator’s previous contract but rather is only required to offer a new employment contract.  That new employment contract may differ from the previous contract offered to the administrator and still comply with the requirements of A.R.S. §15-503(D).

If the school district intends to non-renew the “certified” administrator, then the school district is required to provide the administrator with notice by no later than April 15th of the school district Governing Board’s intention not to renew the administrator’s contract.  It is important to note that the school district Governing Board’s decision to not offer a contract requires a formal decision of the Governing Board which can only occur during a properly convened public meeting (to do otherwise runs the risk of violating the State of Arizona Open Meeting Law).

The notice required by A.R.S. §15-503(D) should be given in writing.  The statue does not specifically state that such notice must be in writing, but in order to avoid controversy it is best practice to deliver the notice in a written format with some form of delivery confirmation.  The notice can be delivered by a member of the school district Governing Board authorized to do so by the Governing Board, the Governing Board itself, or by the school district superintendent.

Finally, A.R.S. §15-503(D) does not require that the school district provide a reason for the non-renewal.  This means that the school district does not have to produce a reason or “just cause” for the non-renewal (as would be required for other school district employee non-renewals).  However, it is important to note that a non-renewal should not be used as a method to effect an employee termination for an impermissible purpose.  What is and what is not considered an impermissible purpose varies greatly depending on the individual circumstances.

It is always best practice for the school district to consult with its legal counsel whenever considering a renewal or non-renewal of a “certified” administrator’s employment contract.  The school district’s legal counsel can assist with the determination of which administrators are considered “certified”, if the non-renewal is being used impermissibly (or gives the appearance of facilitating an impermissible purpose), and the proper procedures for the school district Governing Board to make a renewal decision.  Additionally, school district legal counsel can assist with the terms of the new contract offered to the “certified” administrator while addressing any other lingering school district concerns.

This blog should be used for informational purposes only. It does not create an attorney-client relationship with any reader and should not be construed as legal advice. If you need legal advice regarding Renewal or Non-renewal of School District Administrators, or any other estate planning matters, please feel free to contact at  480.461.5300, log on to udallshumway.com,  or contact an attorney in your area. Udall Shumway PLC is located in Mesa, Arizona and is a full service law firm. We assist Individuals, families, businesses, schools and municipalities in Mesa and the Phoenix/East Valley.